Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russian most powerful submarine
Pravda ^ | July 4 2004 | Andrey Mikhailov

Posted on 07/04/2004 7:05:19 AM PDT by knighthawk

Silent deep-sea hunter marks its 20-year-long service This Russian submarine made Americans to come down with money to aid Russia. This sub has been given various names like "aircraft carrier killer", or "deep-sea gangster", or "silent hunter", to name a few. The multi-purpose nuclear-powered submarine K-284 of Project 971 was commissioned June 16, 1984 crowning the efforts of the Design Bureau Malakhit and the Amurskiy Zavod shipyard in Komsomolsk-na-Amure. In total, 15 boats of that class have been built. In 1996, those involved in the creation of the submarine were awarded the State Prize of the Russian Federation.

For the first time, the shipbuilding yard at Komsomolsk-na-Amure rather than at Severodvinsk or Leningrad had been chosen as the place to lay down a multi-purpose nuclear-powered submarine coded Project 971 Shuka-B. That was an indication of a considerable development of shipbuilding in the Russian Far East.

NATO"s classification "Akula" (Shark) given to the newest submarines of the Russian Navy caused confusion since the name of another Soviet sub, Alfa of Project 705, also began with the letter "A". The acoustic signature of K-284 was 12-15 dB lower (i.e. 4-4.5 times) than that of 671RTM, the most noiseless Russian submarine of the previous generation. Improvement in this key parameter of underwater technology placed Russia among the world"s top submarine shipbuilders. The Akula"s design and acoustic signature had been honed throughout the mass production stage.

The boats of the project were given personal names, so K-317 was dubbed "Pantera". The first submarine built in Severodvinsk, K-480, received the name "Bars", which soon became the class name of all nuclear-powered ships of Project 971. Commander S. V. Efremenko became the first captain of Bars. In December 1997, at the request of the Republic of Tatarstan, Bars was renamed "Ak-Bars". Some years ago, the attack submarine Gepard was commissioned at Severodvinsk. In 1996, the submarine cruiser Vepr was commissioned at Severodvinsk. She had a new design of the pressure hull and different "stuffing" at the same time retaining the shape of its class. Besides, with her another major advance was made in noise reduction. In the West this sub and the subsequent SSNs of Project 971 were designated Akula-II. Integrated automation cut the crew to 73 (31 officers), that was almost twice as less than that of the American Los Angeles class sub (141 men).

According to some US experts, the degree of stealth of the improved sub of Project 971 has caught up with that of the US Navy multi-purpose fourth generation submarine Seawolf (SSN-21). Speed, diving depth and ordnance make these ships approximately peer. Between December 1995 and February 1996, K-461 Volk (manned by the complement from K-317 Pantera under the orders of captain S. Spravtsev and captain V. Korolyov, assistant division commander acting as senior officer on board), had been operating in the Mediterranean Sea to provide long-distance anti-submarine support for the Admiral Kuznetsov heavy aircraft carrying cruiser. The mission included long-term tracking of several NATO submarines, including an American SSN of the Los Angeles class. According to US Navy sources, at tactical speeds 5-7 knots the acoustic quietness of Improved Akula class boats searched by sonars was lower than that of the most advanced US Navy SSNs such as the Improved Los Angeles class. The then chief of US naval operations Admiral Jeremy Boorda said that the American ships were not able to track the Improved Akula at a speed less than 6 to 9 knots (the new Russian boat was eventually contacted in the spring 1995 off the eastern coast of the USA). According to the Adm. J. M. Boorda, the low noise acoustic profile of the improved Akula-II met the requirements of forth generation subs.

After the end of the Cold War, new stealth nuclear-powered submarines in the Russian Fleet aroused serious concern in the USA. In 1991, this matter was even discussed in Congress. American legislators were offered some solutions to turn the situation around to the advantage of the USA. Proposals comprised demands that Russia disclose long-term underwater shipbuilding programs, or establishment of coordinated limits on the number of attack SSNs for both Russia and USA, or calls to assist Russia to convert shipyards building nuke subs to produce non-defense items.

The international environmental NGO "Green Peace" also joined the efforts against the Russian underwater shipbuilding disguised as a drive to ban nuclear-powered submarines (Russian ones, of course, presented, according to "Greens", the greatest environmental hazard). In order to eliminate "nuclear disasters", "Green Peace" recommended Western governments to tie financial aid to Russia with the moves the latter would make to solve this problem. However, as the delivery of new attack submarines to the Russian Navy dramatically slowed down by mid-90s, the issue for USA ceased to be burning, though "environmentalists" (many of whom are known for their tight links to NATO special services), have been pursuing the same policy against the Russian Fleet up to date.

Norman Polmar, Þ well-known US naval analyst, once said that the arrival of submarines of the Akula class and other Russian SSNs of the third generation demonstrated that the Soviet shipbuilders had bridged the gap in the acoustic quieting level unexpectedly fast. Some years later, in 1994, this gap was closed altogether.

What in Project 971 specifically frightened Western analysts? Maybe its innovative solutions such as integrated automation of battle and technical facilities, concentration of ship control and its armament in one place - the main control room, and a state-of-the-art rescue chamber, which demonstrated its efficiency on Project 705 boats?

The following technical data based on open sources may help get the picture: length - 110.3 m; beam -13.6 m; draft - 9.7 m; full displacement - 12,770 tons; maximum diving depth: 600 m; operating depth: 520 m; maximum submerged speed: 33 knots; endurance: 100 days; propulsion: one pressurized water reactor OK-650B (190 MW) with four steam turbines; 1 shaft, 50,000 hps; one 7 bladed propeller with improved acoustic properties and low rotation speed. The Skat-3 MGK-540 sonar system provides digital data processing, enhanced sonar detection and location capabilities. A submarine of Project 971 features double hull construction. The pressure hull material is high strength steel.

An Akula-II class sub can boast highly effective, unique wake-homing capabilities to identify the wake of a submarine many hours after its passing. She is fitted with the Simfonia-U navigation system and Molniya-MTS satellite communications with Tsunami communications antenna and a towed array.

Armed with 40 torpedoes launched from four 533mm (for 28 torpedoes) and four 650mm torpedo tubes, she can also fire Granat cruise missiles, underwater missiles and rocket torpedoes (Shkval, Vodopad, and Veter), torpedoes and torpedo mines. Besides this sub can lay ordinary mines, too.

Currently, all Project 971 multi-purpose nuclear-powered submarines are assigned to the Russian Northern and Pacific Fleets, and by contemporary standards, they are active enough.

In the event of actual conflict, each Project 971 sub is capable to pose a threat to the enemy, draw off its essential forces, and keep the Russian territory intact from strikes.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: akula; miltech; russia; russian; submarine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

1 posted on 07/04/2004 7:05:19 AM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MizSterious; rebdov; Nix 2; green lantern; BeOSUser; Brad's Gramma; dreadme; Turk2; keri; ...

Ping


2 posted on 07/04/2004 7:05:36 AM PDT by knighthawk (We will always remember We will always be proud We will always be prepared so we may always be free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Dream on, Pravda.

The Russians have nothing that comes close to Seawolf.

3 posted on 07/04/2004 7:08:31 AM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Akula-class sub

4 posted on 07/04/2004 7:11:50 AM PDT by martin_fierro (Knees in the breeze)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk

Interesting story. By this time in our history, our biggest enemy was the acquisition bureaucracy in the Pentagon. The Soviets could steal our technology, adapt and produce it faster than we could get it into production ourselves.


5 posted on 07/04/2004 7:12:24 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk

Sure am glad the cold war ended.


6 posted on 07/04/2004 7:13:15 AM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

When was this written? Stupid Pravda. Akula's not the most recent class of Russian subs. They're around the same age as our LA class.

Also, it fails to mention that the reason they're STARTING to catch up with us is cause of Toshiba, who sold the secrets of our submarine propellor technology to anyone with enough money for it, including the Russians.


7 posted on 07/04/2004 7:15:17 AM PDT by Severa (Wife of Freeper Hostel, USN STS3(SS))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
The Russians have nothing that comes close to Seawolf.

I guess that'd be a good thing if we had more than 3 of them in the US Navy.

8 posted on 07/04/2004 7:15:32 AM PDT by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: xrp
3 is plenty if no one can find them.
9 posted on 07/04/2004 7:20:02 AM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
Have you seen the specs on the Virginia class? She looks sweet.

Virginia class

Launching of the USS Virginia scheduled for Oct 23 at NAS Norfolk.

10 posted on 07/04/2004 7:26:47 AM PDT by Severa (Wife of Freeper Hostel, USN STS3(SS))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: xrp

LOL, sad but true...


11 posted on 07/04/2004 7:31:01 AM PDT by Camel Joe (Proud Uncle of a Fine Young Marine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
The Russians have nothing that comes close to Seawolf.

True enough, but Akula and "Akula Improved" were coming off the ways in 1986.
SSN-21 wasn't going to be ready for another decade.

12 posted on 07/04/2004 7:32:13 AM PDT by dread78645 (Sorry Mr. Franklin, We couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk

NSSN VIRGINIA CLASS ATTACK SUBMARINE, USA

The Virginia Class New Attack Submarine is an advanced stealth multi-mission nuclear powered submarine for deep ocean anti-submarine warfare and for littoral (shallow water) operations. Although the Seawolf submarine was developed to provide an eventual replacement for the US Navy Los Angeles Class submarines in combating the Soviet forces, the prohibitive unit cost and changing strategic requirements led to the US Navy defining a smaller new generation attack submarine.

The Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics, Connecticut is the lead design authority for the Virginia Class. General Dynamics Electric Boat is constructing the first of class, Virginia (SSN 774), which is to be delivered in 2004 and commissioned in 2006, and the third vessel, Hawaii SSN 776 (commission in 2008). Virginia was laid down in September 1999 and was christened in August 2003. Northrop Grumman Newport News will construct the second, Texas SSN 775 (commission in 2007) and fourth, North Carolina SSN 777 (commission in 2009). The US Navy's total requirement is for 30 of the class. The USN placed a bulk-buy contract for the first five ships and, in January 2004, placed a multi-year contract for the following five.

DESIGN

The engineering teams and the design and build teams at Electric Boat in partnership with the Naval Sea Systems Command, NAVSEA, of the US Navy have used extensive CAD/CAE simulation systems to optimise the design of the submarine. The hull size is length 377ft by beam 34ft and the displacement is 7,300t dived, which is smaller than the more expensive Seawolf Attack Submarine with displacement 9137t dived.

The hull structure contains structurally integrated enclosures, which accommodate standard 19in and 24in width equipment for ease of installation, repair and upgrade of the submarine's systems. The submarine is fitted with modular isolated deck structures, for example the submarine's Command Center will be installed as one single unit resting on cushioned mounting points. The submarine's control suite is equipped with computer touch screens. The submarine's steering and diving control is via a four-button, two-axis joystick.

The noise level of the Virginia is equal to that of the US Navy Seawolf, SSN 21, with a lower acoustic signature than the Russian Improved Akula Class and Russian Fourth Generation Attack Submarines. To achieve this low acoustic signature, the Virginia incorporates newly designed anechoic coatings, isolated deck structures and a new design of propulsor.

Goodrich is supplying High Frequency Sail Array acoustic windows and composite sonar domes.

COMMAND SYSTEM

The C3I (Command, Control, Communication and Intelligence) system is being developed by a team led by Lockheed Martin Naval Electronics & Surveillance Systems-Undersea Systems (NE&SS-Undersea Systems) of Manassas, Virginia. It will integrate all of the vessel's systems - sensors, countermeasures, navigation, weapon control, and will be based on open system architecture (OSA) with Q-70 Colour Common Display Consoles. Weapon control will be provided by Raytheon with a derivative of the CCS Mk 2 combat system.

WEAPON SYSTEMS

The submarine is equipped with twelve vertical missile launch tubes and four 533mm torpedo tubes. The vertical launching system has the capacity to launch 16 Tomahawk submarine launched cruise missiles (SLCM) in a single salvo. There is capacity for up to 26 Mk 48 ADCAP Mod 6 heavyweight torpedoes and Sub Harpoon anti-ship missiles to be fired from the 21in torpedo tubes. Mk 60 CAPTOR mines may also be fitted.

Virginia will be fitted with the AN/WLY-1 acoustic countermeasures system being developed by Northrop Grumman, which provides range and bearing data, and the mast-mounted AN/BLQ-10 electronic support measures (ESM) system from Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems.

An integral lock out/lock-in chamber is incorporated into the hull for special operations. The chamber can host a mini-submarine, such as Northrop Grumman's Oceanic and Naval Systems Advanced SEAL Delivery System (ASDS), to deliver special warfare forces such as Navy Sea Air Land, SEAL, teams or Marine reconnaissance units for counter-terrorism or localised conflict operations.

SENSORS

The Virginia Class sonar suite will include bow-mounted active and passive array, wide aperture passive array on flank, high-frequency active arrays on keel and fin, TB 16 towed array and the Lockheed Martin TB-29A thinline towed array, with a variant of AN/BQQ-10 sonar processing system. A BPS 16 navigation radar, operating at I-band is fitted.

The submarines will have two Kollmorgen AN/BVS-1 Photonic Masts, rather than optical periscopes. Sensors mounted on the non-hull penetrating Photonic Mast include LLTV (low light TV), thermal imager and laser rangefinder. The mast is the Universal Modular Mast developed by Kollmorgen and its Italian subsidiary, Calzoni.

The Boeing LMRS Long-term Mine Reconnaissance System will be deployed on the Virginia Class. LMRS includes two 6m autonomous unmanned underwater vehicles, an 18m robotic recovery arm and support electronics.

PROPULSION

The main propulsion units are the GE Pressure Water Reactor S9G, designed to last as long the submarine, two turbine engines with one shaft and a pump jet propulser. The speed is 28 knots dived.

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/nssn/


13 posted on 07/04/2004 7:32:21 AM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
But are they safe for the operators?

Soviet-era submarines were notoriously unreliable, and several Soviet submarines suffered serious nuclear reactor accidents.

14 posted on 07/04/2004 7:38:17 AM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
3 is plenty if no one can find them.

Only if they're where you need them to be - and it's a big, big ocean out there.
15 posted on 07/04/2004 7:38:37 AM PDT by Gorjus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
though "environmentalists" (many of whom are known for their tight links to NATO special services)

The author certainly got this right. Greens are known around the world for their tight military-industrial complex sympathies.

16 posted on 07/04/2004 7:43:54 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
A neat Smithsonian website on subs:

HERE

17 posted on 07/04/2004 7:45:12 AM PDT by FReepaholic (War On Terror: If not us, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott
Sure am glad the cold war ended.

I would rather have the cold war than the war on terror.

18 posted on 07/04/2004 7:48:09 AM PDT by Major_Risktaker (Oderint dum metuant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tscislaw
Here's a question for the sub experts around here. Explain the different design philosophies between the U.S and Russian sail configurations. The Russian boats sure LOOK a lot more advanced, compared to the more traditional looking U.S. sails that stick straight up.
19 posted on 07/04/2004 7:51:21 AM PDT by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Severa
Also, it fails to mention that the reason they're STARTING to catch up with us is cause of Toshiba, who sold the secrets of our submarine propellor technology to anyone with enough money for it, including the Russians.

Glad someone else remembers that. Oh - and guess which computer company has a contract with the USN for the PCs on some of the ships? (or at least had the contract back in about 1999-2000).

20 posted on 07/04/2004 7:52:53 AM PDT by Tennessee_Bob (http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson